p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK TRPCRL No. 9 of 2026 Jitendra Kumar Senapati &. Petitioner Mr. P.K.Jena, Advocate -versus- Heena Hasmi &. Opposite Party CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO Order No. ORDER 09.03.2026 (Hybrid Mode) 01. 1. The petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of ICC No. 17 of 2023 pending before the learned S.D.J.M, Balangir filed by the petitioner against opposite party under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, to be transferred to the court of learned J.M.F.C.(R), Cuttack. As it is disclosed in the said application, the ICC case was filed in the year 2023. Learned SDJM, Balangir took cognizane. The certified copy of the orders passed in ICC No. 17 of 2023 starting with 1.2.2023 upto 15.11.2025 has been filed. It indicates that the matter has been taken up by the said learned Court on as many as 39 dates. 2. The petitioner gave his examination in chief as recorded in order no.34 dated 15.1.2025 and he has been discharged. Thereafter NBW was issued by order p. 2 dated 15.1.2025 against the accused person. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner produces certified copy of the order sheet. Attested photocopy of which is retained. From the order dated 9.10.2025 it is apparent that the opposite party-accused person has appeared through her learned counsel. 3. During pendency of the case, CRLMC No. 4677 of 2025 was filed before this Court by the opposite party accused challenging NBW dated 15.1.2025. The said order was set aside by order dated 13.11.2025 by this Court in CRLMC No. 4677 of 2025 directing payment of cost of ¹800/- to the Advocates Welfare Fund of the local Bar Association of Balangir. Upon conditional order being complied with, by order dated 1.12.2025, appearance of the opposite party was acknowledged and she was released on bail as earlier she was released on 1.8.2024. 4. After the learned counsel has completed his submissions, on being asked which provision he relies on to seek transfer of the ICC Case, he submits that the reason for seeking transfer is bona fide as the wife of the petitioner is unfortunately suffering from cancer and the provision he is rely is section 407(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. For convenience of reference the said provision as it would have bearing on deciding the issue, is reproduced herein : <S. 407 Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals (1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court4 (a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court subordinate thereto, or p. 3 (b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise; or (c) that an order under this section is required by any provision of this Code, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice, it may order- (i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified under sections 177 to 185 (both inclusive), but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offence; (ii) that any particular case, or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction; (iii) that any particular case be committed for trial of to a Court of Session; or (iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself. (2) The High Court may act either on the report of the lower Court, or on the application of a party interested, or on its own initiative;= xxx xxx xxx 5. Perusal of the said section indicates that it has to be made to appear to the High Court as provided in section 407(1)(b) that some question of law of unsual difficult likely to arise. The present case is under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The ICC is pending since 2023 and has been listed on several occasions before the learned S.D.J.M. who has passed as many as 40 orders till 1.12.2025. As has been noticed above, the complainant has been examined in chief and has been discharged. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per his instruction complainant is to be cross-examined. Page 4 of 5 6. In considered view of this Court, applying the principles contained in section 407 of Cr.P.C., (since repealed and substituted by pari materia provision contained in BNSS, 2023) would not lead to a conclusion that convenience of witnesses has to be looked into by this Court for transferring a petition which is in the advance stage of adjudication. As it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petition may be bona fide but it should also serve the ends of justice and transferring the matter would delay the proceeding which can be decided within a short time. 7. Accordingly prayer made in the application is rejected. Petition is disposed of. 8. However, it is directed that the complainant petitioner if so advised applies for utilization of ICT facility and the same is available before the learned S.D.J.M., Balangir, the learned court shall consider the said application and pass orders in accordance with law. It is expected that the parties to the ICC shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the matter. 9. Copy of this order shall be forwarded to learned S.D.J.M., Balangir to be kept in the records of ICC No. 17 of 2023. (Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge dutta